Subscriptions
Read Our Monthly Magazine
And support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system
There is no doubt that the actions of the most senior members of the Conservative Party have encouraged the riots by right-wing racist thugs that we saw recently in the UK.
That encouragement was not some unavoidable consequence of legitimate policy positions, but through actions or words that Conservative politicians could have avoided without changing policies.
Yet ironically, these riots during a leadership election give the party a unique opportunity to turn a page and turn their back on Farage-type populism. The signs are they will not take that opportunity.
Attacks by right-wing thugs on hotels housing asylum seekers can be directly linked to the decision by the last Conservative Government to call those refugees that come to the UK by small boats from France “illegal”, and their failure to process asylum claims quickly. Attacks on mosques reflect the Conservative party tolerating, even at the most senior level within the party, Islamophobic language.
The 2021 Nationality and Borders Act, introduced by Priti Patel, criminalised those who arrived in the UK without authorisation even if they subsequently claimed asylum.
From that point on, Conservative politicians almost without exception referred to anyone crossing the Channel in small boats as illegal migrants, and much of the media followed suit.
This had no policy purpose. This act, unlike subsequent legislation, didn’t stop the Government from processing asylum claims, and anyone who successfully claimed asylum was not immediately arrested because they had come here illegally. Most ‘illegal migrants’ who came via small boats claimed asylum, and most of those claims were granted.
So why introduce the term ‘illegal migrant’ for asylum seekers if it made no difference? If you talk about refugees, that immediately brings to mind people who are seeking refuge from war or persecution, which naturally generates sympathy for the victim.
If instead, you talk about illegal migrants, that brings to mind criminality rather than sympathy. This is classic right-wing populism: create a category of people who are outsiders and do what you can to demonise them.
Of course, this was not the only aspect of how the Conservatives treated asylum seekers that was gratuitously inflammatory.
Cutting back on resources to process asylum claims meant a large backlog of people were caught in limbo waiting for Government decisions, many of which the Government housed in hotels.
Those being processed were not allowed to work. This was a gift to those like Nigel Farage who could suggest that “illegal migrants” were being given free accommodation at the taxpayers’ expense.
More generally, Conservative rhetoric encouraged the idea that the UK could be highly selective about the countries from where asylum claims would be considered, which goes against the whole concept of a refugee. Calling them “illegal” was a rhetorical device to make that seem acceptable.
All this encourages racists to attack the hotels where asylum seekers are staying waiting for their claims to be processed. It doesn’t excuse that behaviour, nothing does, but by denigrating those who should have our (provisional) sympathy it makes it easier for racist thugs to believe that such attacks are justified. Elite rhetoric can easily normalise far-right views and behaviour.
The new Labour government very quickly started using the term “irregular” rather than “illegal” migration for those coming here via small boats. In response James Cleverly, one of the candidates for leader of the Conservative party, said: “Changing ‘illegal migration’ to ‘irregular migration’ will be seen as an invitation to the people smugglers.”
Another, Robert Jenrick, tweeted “you misspelt illegal”. A third candidate is Priti Patel, who started the whole thing off.
